I'd go Taurus. 550 is ridiculous for a .22 kit gun and the Smith ain't nothin' special. If you find a used K22 Masterpiece (M17 I think) in good shape for under 400, go for it. Those things were wonderful, much nicer than the J framed kit guns.
Or, you could go single action. I like Ruger's single six and bearcat.
I really don't know much about the pathfinder. If you find one, check it for timing, wear, forcing cone gap, etc and if it checks, I would buy one before I spent $550 on a .22 kit gun. I'd get a Buckmark, Mark 2 (Ruger) or other such auto before I spend $550 on a kit gun. The Ruger Mk2 is a fine little semi auto. Walther makes a NEAT looking little .22 auto and then there's that Sig Trail-something that I think sells for under 400. Lots of fantastic autos for less than that Smith kit gun.
I was looking at a little Walther .22 auto at a gun shop a while back and had to pry myself away from the counter, LOL! I have a few .22 autos, but this one looked neat and high quality and was in the 300 and something range. I have a Rossi M511 "kit gun" in stainless that's quite accurate and I like it a lot and it set me back $200. I put a Pachmayr Compac on it. DA kinda sux, but SA is light and crisp. DA on your average Smith kit gun ain't too great, either, but better than the Rossi, but for 550, it oughta be! I can tell ya this, I don't think the Smith would be any more accurate. That Rossi shoots just under 2" off the bench at 25 yards with cheap Federal Lightening bulk pack stuff and with RWS it pushes close to an inch. Not bad for what most here would call a cheap POS not worthy of owning. I don't need no stinkin' Smith. If I were to stumble upon an old K22, though, I might need that.
Those things were probably the best .22 revolver ever produced IMHO and I don't know what they run used now days, but I doubt they'd break 500 bucks and one in good shape would be worth that IMHO.